News in brief

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Mutex
Posts: 1377
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby Mutex » Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:59 am UTC

Indeed, whatever way the decision went it would cut both ways. For example if they'd ruled against the bakers, anyone would be able to force gay baker (or anyone who supports gay marriage) to bake a cake with "NO TO GAY MARRIAGE" on it, or even worse. I guess there'd still be a limit to the message they could be forced to write onto a cake, eg "death to gay people" would probably run afoul of incitement to hatred laws, but people could force you to write some pretty horrible stuff onto a cake, and it could even be a method for harassment.

This way, if a baker refuses to write your message onto a cake, the best thing to do is ask a different baker, and not give the first baker your business. The UK is densely populated, so chances are extremely low you won't be able to find a baker who'll support your cause. Unless it's really that unpopular, ISIS supporters will probably have to buy a plain cake and invest in a cake writing pen.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6525
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby sardia » Sun Oct 14, 2018 2:47 pm UTC

The US went the other way, under the principle of religious freedom and freedom of speech. It's not a direction you want to go. For one thing, it sets a precedent that religious beliefs trumps anti discrimination. That's why we get hospitals that refuse abortion/birth control (Catholics) or employers that refuse to pay for certain insurance coverage under religious reasons.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6269
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: News in brief

Postby Thesh » Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:20 pm UTC

Well, in Colorado it was ruled that you are forced to serve a gay couple, but you are not forced to write a message on the cake.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

commodorejohn
Posts: 1113
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 6:21 pm UTC
Location: Placerville, CA
Contact:

Re: News in brief

Postby commodorejohn » Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:23 pm UTC

I mean, yeah, there was really no good outcome here and the entire fiasco is an excellent example of Why We Can't Have Nice Things.

But then, freedom of speech (and, accordingly, the principle that nobody gets to make you say something you disagree with) is the absolute number-one bedrock foundation of individual rights in this country. So if we as a society have to choose one way or the other? Choose the option that's in accord with that.
"'Legacy code' often differs from its suggested alternative by actually working and scaling."
- Bjarne Stroustrup
www.commodorejohn.com - in case you were wondering, which you probably weren't.

Mutex
Posts: 1377
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby Mutex » Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:28 pm UTC

Thesh wrote:Well, in Colorado it was ruled that you are forced to serve a gay couple, but you are not forced to write a message on the cake.

That's the same ruling as the UK. You can't refuse to serve someone because they're gay, but you can refuse to write a message you don't agree with.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Oct 14, 2018 3:32 pm UTC

sardia wrote:The US went the other way, under the principle of religious freedom and freedom of speech. It's not a direction you want to go. For one thing, it sets a precedent that religious beliefs trumps anti discrimination. That's why we get hospitals that refuse abortion/birth control (Catholics) or employers that refuse to pay for certain insurance coverage under religious reasons.


The lack of birth control is an issue, and while abortion is a serious issue the removal of Roe v Wade is not an apocalypse (though it is a step on the way there of course). Let's say Barto Kav is the swing vote needed to undo RvW, but overturning it does not instantly mean abortions are banned throughout the country, though again, it is the first step in that direction. What'll happen is that places like Texas and Alabama will ban abortions in their states, while it'll still be legal in Pennsylvania and Illinois. A pregnant teen in Missouri will have to go to Chicago to get an abortion, which is difficult if you are poor, of course, and I suspect you will see a large number of charities will be established to help people pay for the travel expenses. This is actually the way things are going anyway, with the states issuing constantly changing building codes on abortion clinics (e.g., doorway must be X wide, no the doorway must now be less than X wide, must be next to hospital, may not be located within 1000 feet of school which abuts said hospital), so we are getting there regardless of the SC anyway.

However, with the end of Roe v Wade, it's not too many steps further to ban it throughout the US, which is much, much worse. While a Canadian day trip isn't much more expensive than going to Chicago, it also requires a passport and so forth, something which can be taken away due to probation, drug convictions, impending court cases, etc etc. Wait a sec, that also happens in state too...

Ok nevermind, overturning Roe v Wade is definitely bad.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: News in brief

Postby Sableagle » Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:07 pm UTC


Didn't read article. Just saw snippet. Based on snippet, the US shuold increase its nuclear capabilities until the rest of the world comes to its senses about nuclear weaopns and realises that on ly the US should have nuclear capabilities? After all, they're the only nation to have proven that they know how to use them. :roll:
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6543
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: News in brief

Postby ucim » Sun Oct 14, 2018 11:19 pm UTC

re: "our words are backed" "with nuclear weapons"

Old news. The post (and the links) are from December, 2016.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

WriteBrainedJR
Posts: 117
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Right Behind You
Contact:

Re: News in brief

Postby WriteBrainedJR » Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:01 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:While a Canadian day trip isn't much more expensive than going to Chicago, it also requires a passport and so forth, something which can be taken away due to probation, drug convictions, impending court cases

...living too close to the Mexican border.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Oct 15, 2018 1:29 am UTC

...where It's legal in many places there, and in spite of what you may think the doctors actually are competent.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: News in brief

Postby Sableagle » Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:19 am UTC

ucim wrote:re: "our words are backed" "with nuclear weapons"

Old news. The post (and the links) are from December, 2016.

Jose

Okay. That's interesting. I'm pretty sure I *did* type out the rest of that thought.

Well, at least it didn't have credit card numbers or passwords in it. I hate typing one of those and then not knowing where it went.

It was ... something about the upcoming elections and a change of tune. I can't remember now. Did he change his tune right away or not until this year's election campaigns started ... or did this year's election campaigns start in January 2017 anyway?
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3641
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: News in brief

Postby Soupspoon » Mon Oct 15, 2018 12:01 pm UTC

I was confused. I recognised it as something I'd likely written, as quoted. (But guessed, before checking the links, it was about NoKo.) Did you accidentally Save As Draft, back then, and accidentally reload and post it just now? I somehow Marked Everything As Read a few weeks back, and misclicked a subscription to a thread so I was getting rogue "new posts to" notifications for a thread that I mistook for "you have been quoted by" ones at first.

When I'm tapping away with the charger plugged in I occasionally get rogue-clicks. Just now it helpfully 'downloaded' this page, despite my fingers being nowhere near that part of the screen with the symbol on it. I think it's a minor unplanned electrical pathing behind the capacitance layer (or around the logic-chip that discerns multi-touchness). It can 'poke' the address bar of the browser and choose a random URL in the pop-down, suddenly pinch-zoom the page, choose a number of select shortcut words from above the keyboard while I'm trying to type something else and other awkwardnesses.


ObNews: Brexit and Internet to blame for car not going fast?

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Oct 15, 2018 2:31 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Ok nevermind, overturning Roe v Wade is definitely bad.


Yup. Even if you don't care either way about abortion, it would whittle down some personal rights to one's own body/privacy. I'm pretty comfortable describing it as bad for a number of reasons.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6525
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby sardia » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:18 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Ok nevermind, overturning Roe v Wade is definitely bad.


Yup. Even if you don't care either way about abortion, it would whittle down some personal rights to one's own body/privacy. I'm pretty comfortable describing it as bad for a number of reasons.

Is there evidence that abortion limits as a precedent for other bad things? Like I know politicians don't have a problem being hypocrites, so it shouldn't really matter. For example, the freedom of religion BS is a concerted effort to enable religious discrimination. No mandate to serve Gays, cuz religion> anti discrimination laws. Therefore, no abortion/birth control at religious hospitals cuz religion>similar law/rule.
I don't see that in abortion cases.

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5801
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: News in brief

Postby Angua » Mon Oct 15, 2018 4:51 pm UTC

I mean, limits on abortion have lead to a death in Irelandbecause the doctors refused to abort a pregnancy where the foetus was literally swimming in pus and there was no hope of saving the pregnancy.

So, I guess how it depends on how you define a 'bad thing' when it comes to the lives of women.

edit to clarify - I think a woman should be able to have an abortion whenever she wishes, however there is clear precedent that if abortion itself is illegal, it leads to riskier decision when it comes to the safety of the mother while pregnant.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Oct 15, 2018 5:05 pm UTC

But the truth is, the idea that even fetuses (feti?) are alive and should have some rights is not an absurd idea. The question becomes whether that right to life, if it exists, should trump most, some or none of the mother's rights. And if you believe that an unwanted pregnancy is like a squatter that won't leave your home, squatters' rights do vary from state to state but generally you aren't allowed to shoot them.

Personally, I don't want to pay for and/or suffer the unwanted kids that I didn't create, so I'm voting for my wallet...

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:38 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Ok nevermind, overturning Roe v Wade is definitely bad.


Yup. Even if you don't care either way about abortion, it would whittle down some personal rights to one's own body/privacy. I'm pretty comfortable describing it as bad for a number of reasons.

Is there evidence that abortion limits as a precedent for other bad things? Like I know politicians don't have a problem being hypocrites, so it shouldn't really matter. For example, the freedom of religion BS is a concerted effort to enable religious discrimination. No mandate to serve Gays, cuz religion> anti discrimination laws. Therefore, no abortion/birth control at religious hospitals cuz religion>similar law/rule.
I don't see that in abortion cases.


I mean, sure, hypocrisy is pretty common. So consistency is definitely not guaranteed. Fair. But abortion is definitely tied pretty strongly to religious sentiment. Quite a lot of the pro-life sorts are religiously motivated, and there's pretty high overlap with the other groups you mention. Now, they've been rooting so long for repealing Roe vs Wade that I'm not sure what they'll do if they get that. I don't think it'll be "stop imposing religious beliefs on others", though.

CorruptUser wrote:But the truth is, the idea that even fetuses (feti?) are alive and should have some rights is not an absurd idea.


It's not absurd. Sure, it's alive, but is that life more important that an individuals freedom? Is it moral to force someone to do a thing/be a thing, even if in doing so, it saves a life? Imagine I developed some process by which I kept a person in excruciating pain for a few months, but in doing so, was able to save someone else's life. It'd be moral for people to choose that, perhaps, but it would not be moral to force people into that situation.

Hell, consider the case of a kidney donor. Many people can donate a kidney. There is some pain involved, some recovery, and a few health tradeoffs. But one can save a life in doing so. We still shouldn't force people to donate kidneys.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:08 pm UTC

I think that's a bit of an exaggeration of the effects of pregnancy. At the same time, it's certainly much more than being asked to donate a hair follicle and be pinched for a few seconds in order to save someone else's life, in the bizarre scenario where that's required.

If you feel like continuing this further, is there an abortion thread? I don't feel like cluttering up this thread with abortion debate crap.

asoban
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 11:00 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby asoban » Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:27 pm UTC


Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:05 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I think that's a bit of an exaggeration of the effects of pregnancy. At the same time, it's certainly much more than being asked to donate a hair follicle and be pinched for a few seconds in order to save someone else's life, in the bizarre scenario where that's required.

If you feel like continuing this further, is there an abortion thread? I don't feel like cluttering up this thread with abortion debate crap.


No analogy is perfect, but a kidney donation is perhaps a rough comparison. For instance, the more children you have, statistically, the faster you age*. And certainly there is significant inconvenience in/leading up to childbirth, in a fashion similar to recuperating from a kidney donation. In neither case would it be advisable to consume a bunch of alcohol, physical activity can be somewhat restricted, and so on.

And yet a kidney donation being coerced would be far beyond the pale of what we would consider acceptable.

If you want to start/move this to a dedicated thread, fair enough.

*https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0145753

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5801
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: News in brief

Postby Angua » Mon Oct 15, 2018 9:17 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:I think that's a bit of an exaggeration of the effects of pregnancy. At the same time, it's certainly much more than being asked to donate a hair follicle and be pinched for a few seconds in order to save someone else's life, in the bizarre scenario where that's required.

I would invite you to pick up an obstetric textbook and then come and talk to us about how uncomplicated pregnancy can be. Make sure it includes all the stuff that can still happen post partum as well (given those will be more likely if forced to carry the pregnancy full term). Also that it includes all the prolapsing as well from wrecking your pelvic floor at the end.

If pregnancy was a walk in the park, obstetricians would not have to exist.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:20 am UTC

I'm just saying that a kidney transplant is probably more extreme a comparison than necessary, in that it's a far more damaging and disfiguring procedure than a pregnancy. Perhaps multiple bone marrow transplants would be a better comparison? With only minimal anesthesia, if any. Plus the months of preparation in advance.

Ok, yeah... I'm a tad horrified by a world in which people could be nabbed while walking home in order to have their bone marrow extracted, even if it does save a life...

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1832
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: News in brief

Postby natraj » Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:30 am UTC

in which corruptuser demonstrates how very little he knows about pregnancy
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

asoban
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2013 11:00 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby asoban » Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:39 am UTC

From https://www.verywellhealth.com/the-risk ... ow-2252482
According to the National Marrow Donor Program, 2.4% of people who donate bone marrow experience a serious complication. Very few bone marrow donors suffer any long-term complications from their donation.

Around the world, researchers looked at over 27,000 people who had donated bone marrow in 35 countries. Of these people, there was one death and 12 serious events (mostly heart related) that were felt to be related to bone marrow donation.


1:27,000 death rate

From http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheet ... -mortality
The maternal mortality ratio in developing countries in 2015 is 239 per 100 000 live births versus 12 per 100 000 live births in developed countries.


1:8,333 death rate

From https://www.kidneyregistry.org/living_donors.php

Although more than 5,000 living donors in the United States donate their kidneys every year, the procedure is not without risks. The donor surgery has a .03% mortality rate (i.e., 3 in 10,000).


1:3,333 death rate

Donating bone marrow is therefore significantly less risky than giving birth and donating a kidney is riskier than giving birth in the developed world.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10211
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby CorruptUser » Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:48 am UTC

Which is why I said multiple bone marrow transplants.

Tyndmyr wrote:For instance, the more children you have, statistically, the faster you age*


The study you cited, as far as I can tell, does not adjust for wealth/income/socialstatus. Fertility is inversely proportionate with wealth, and poverty ages you pretty rapidly.


But meh, not really wanting to fight anyone on this. You guys want to say a childbirth is the equivalent of an organ donation, fine, sure, whatever. Pretty horrific thing to inflict on someone against their will, or even if they initially agreed to the procedure and had second thoughts but Mitch McConnell said nope, gotta yank me some kidneys for my pies.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby Tyndmyr » Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:00 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:The study you cited, as far as I can tell, does not adjust for wealth/income/socialstatus. Fertility is inversely proportionate with wealth, and poverty ages you pretty rapidly.


Fertility gets a lot less costly with wealth and modern medical advancements, true. But without that, it used to be that "died in childbirth" was pretty common. Not so much anymore, thanks to the aforementioned improvements, but childbirth has some pretty real dangers even if we're just looking at direct consequences.

But meh, not really wanting to fight anyone on this. You guys want to say a childbirth is the equivalent of an organ donation, fine, sure, whatever. Pretty horrific thing to inflict on someone against their will, or even if they initially agreed to the procedure and had second thoughts but Mitch McConnell said nope, gotta yank me some kidneys for my pies.


That's fair. Even something like bone marrow or, quite safely, blood donations would be really weird to require of someone. I've donated blood a fair number of times voluntarily, but the idea of being forced to do it just jumps over that line of propriety. Bodily autonomy is important. Anything that threatens that is a bit worrisome even if the law itself isn't.

Sure, it's a slippery slope argument, but it's not as if abortion is the only moralizing thing the religious right has done. If they win the fight, they'll pick another.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6525
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby sardia » Tue Oct 16, 2018 3:33 pm UTC

Iirc, the fight after abortion is the purity movement. The one where women suppress their desires as sinful until the moment they get married, then theyre sex and baby machines. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... DZXEHjwQt6
Women serve as double duty, both as objects of lust, and people to blame for bad/sinful behavior of boys.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3641
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: News in brief

Postby Soupspoon » Thu Oct 18, 2018 9:31 pm UTC

In Space news, people are currently wondering about Moonmoons, or Moon-moons, or Mooons, or Submoons, or… Both about their existence and what we should call them.

"That's no Moonmoon of the Forest Moon of Endor of the Gas Giant Endor of the binary stars Endor I and Endor II! That's the second Deathstar! But let's just call it the Deathendor, so as not to confuse things, ok?"

ijuin
Posts: 895
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby ijuin » Fri Oct 19, 2018 7:19 am UTC

A moon could have a subordinate natural satellite provided that its Hill sphere were sufficiently large for the satellite to orbit without being perturbed by the gravity of the parent planet or sister moons.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3641
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: News in brief

Postby Soupspoon » Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:03 pm UTC

Much as the various reports state. Luna, Callisto (of Jupiter) and Titan/Iapatus (of Saturn) are four local candidates of moons capable of supporting moonmoons.

And if there's an exomoon (as suspected) orbiting Kepler-1625b, this proposed Neptunesque gas-giant moon orbiting the much larger gas-giant we know about maybe has room-for-a-moon of it's own.

The greatest enemy would be constructive periodicity developing any such orbit into a more eliptical one that put it in danger of poking too far out of the safe zone at apoapsis or so close at periapsis that it gets torn apart or performs aero/lithobraking.

Rewind even a stable version, and one would also wonder how the knife-edge stability arose in the first place. But with enough random nudges of random objects it'd probably happen somewhere, with looser tolerances than needed for a klemperer rosette (which aint saying much!).

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2985
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: News in brief

Postby orthogon » Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:17 pm UTC

Soupspoon wrote:And if there's an exomoon (as suspected) orbiting Kepler-1625b, this proposed Neptunesque gas-giant moon orbiting the much larger gas-giant we know about maybe has room-for-a-moon of it's own.

A Moon with a View?
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3641
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: News in brief

Postby Soupspoon » Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:23 pm UTC

Though that's what came to mind, I doubt it. There'd be that nonsubmoon shining in the sky, half the time for most of its phases.

(Still it might lead to mooon locals skipping quicker over a moooncentric view of the universe.)

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: News in brief

Postby ObsessoMom » Thu Nov 01, 2018 3:56 pm UTC

This was forwarded to me by another member of the League of Women Voters, who knows the member who was quoted in the story.

LA Times Publishes Completely Different Political Endorsements in English and Spanish

Whoa. That's...whoa.

Spoiler:
Somewhat, but not really, related: I just about laughed my butt off at Feinstein's cringeworthy accent in this ad that came on while I was watching the news in Spanish a couple of days ago.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2985
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: News in brief

Postby orthogon » Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:43 pm UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:This was forwarded to me by another member of the League of Women Voters, who knows the member who was quoted in the story.

LA Times Publishes Completely Different Political Endorsements in English and Spanish

Whoa. That's...whoa.

I'd be more concerned if they reported different facts. In the end, the endorsement is just an opinion, and the two editions have somewhat different editorial staff (with some overlap), so the two editions can have different opinions. The overlap with HOY clearly confused the issue further. Until recently, here in the UK we had sister rags (one for Monday-Saturday, one for Sunday) with editors on opposite sides of the Brexit debate, sharing a website that made no obvious distinction between articles from each, which was ... confusing. (One of them definitely doesn't qualify as a proper newspaper - Wikipedia has deemed it an unreliable source).

I guess your suspicion is that they're endorsing candidates that their two readerships are likely to prefer anyway, in an attempt to maximise loyalty and circulation. Maybe - then again I'd rather our media did that than that they take a financial loss in order to peddle political opinions that happen to favour their billionaire expat owners...
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests